vote green

jimaneejeebus

If anyone were a true environmentalist, they'd know that nuclear power is the only source of energy that will 'liberate' us somewhat from fossil fuels.

People really need to learn some basic science

Arnold Layne

dynamick wrote: »

I'm voting green because I'm interested in energy use, transport and planning and the greens can see that they're all linked together. Plan cities badly and you can't put in good public transport and your energy use shoots up.

The other parties see consumption as part of wealth. One component of GDP is public consumption. So the more crap you buy, the richer you are. To me this is nonsense and I'm happier with a philosophy of efficiency and reuse.

The greens have made mistakes but they've been in government in the toughest financial crisis that came about as a result of policies they opposed.

Lastly I think the left-right thing is over. We need public services and welfare but we also need a good competitive business environment. I don't want a union funded and controlled labour party or a wannabe tory party with Varadkar and Creighton at the helm, pretending they are different from Fianna Fail despite being funded by the same companies and wealthy people.

so Vote Green tomorrow!

So, lets all vote green because it really wasn't their fault.

They didn't know that;
(a) Preventing stag hunting would condemn us, and our descendants,to debt,
(b) Increasing carbon taxes, that have no relevance to the environment but to exchequer, would have no benefit to stopping Global Warming (Sorry, Climate Change)

Vote Green, were a naive shower of ****es but we deserve our pensions,
Vote Green, we'll give you broadband, on a stick (not broadband
Vote Green, because we're more smug than the rest
Vote Green, because we don't achieve
Vote Green, Planet Gormless is utopia; Whatever Planet Gormley is (It may change)

Jim Stark

vaalea wrote: »

vote green. people love to vote for the same old parties thinking they are going to get a CHANGE?! A real message to politicians is kicking old parties to the curb and seeing if a different party can breathe some fresh air into politics.

a vote for green IS a vote for the economy if any of you have been reading up on the economics of climate change and green collar jobs. Green Party is not just about environment, it is about sustainability in all areas, and that means long term employment prospects, not short sighted quick fixes.. and it means working for priceless equality and quality of life rather than quick big $$.

Why do so many people overlook the greens?

No.

johno2

jimaneejeebus wrote: »

Originally Posted by johno2
I never heard the 2020 reference. I'd like to see a link if you have one.

Their manifesto ?????

Their manifesto says the target is to produce 40% of our energy from renewables by 2020. How does that liberate us from oil?

johno

johno2

jimaneejeebus wrote: »

If anyone were a true environmentalist, they'd know that nuclear power is the only source of energy that will 'liberate' us somewhat from fossil fuels.

People really need to learn some basic science

You've got a point there. I take it you're going to vote for the party that has construction of nuclear power plants on their manifesto then.

johno

jimaneejeebus

johno2 wrote: »

Their manifesto says the target is to produce 40% of our energy from renewables by 2020. How does that liberate us from oil?

johno

Their manifesto says they will "Roll out a strategy to set Ireland on the road to being an oil free economy by 2030."

What?

are we going to have
No plastic?
No steel?
No Cars?
No Food?




What planet are you living on?
Learn some basic physics before you go yapping on about stuff you really don't understand.

Liam Byrne

johno2 wrote: »

I live in a housing estate with about 25 houses, all very similar. Most houses in Limerick have a driveway, lots have a driveway big enough for 2 cars.

Where is Fitzhaven anyway? In Limerick?

Surely you're not gonna blame the Greens for building it are you?

johno

As you said yourself - "lots" have a driveway big enough for two. Not "all".

And what about 3 people renting a 3-bed house?

I'm not blaming the Greens for building anything, so quit being mischevious!

I am blaming them for foisting unworkable solutions on us, and for taxing people who have no choices even more.

Create the alternatives and then charge the same or less for those; then I'll consider the greens as being in the real world.

Mind you, even then they'll get no forgiveness for NAMA & Anglo & propping up FF, so let them off in their own planet - it'll keep them occupied during their forthcoming unemployment.

jimaneejeebus

johno2 wrote: »

You've got a point there. I take it you're going to vote for the party that has construction of nuclear power plants on their manifesto then.

johno

I haven't seen a party that has this on their manifesto, but if they did-even if it was fianna fail- I would vote for them.

This is the only currently available technology that can have us somewhat fossil fuel independent.

johno2

jimaneejeebus wrote: »

Their manifesto says they will "Roll out a strategy to set Ireland on the road to being an oil free economy by 2030."

Fine, I asked you for a link to tell me where you saw them saying they would liberate us from oil be 2020? You still haven't done that, and changing 2020 to 2030 isn't fooling anyone except yourself.

jimaneejeebus wrote: »

What?

are we going to have
No plastic?
No steel?
No Cars?
No Food?

What planet are you living on?
Learn some basic physics before you go yapping on about stuff you really don't understand.

We don't produce cars or steel in this country, it's all imported. Plastic and food can be produced without oil (well mineral oil anyway). And where did you pull these claims that we'll have none of these products in our lives anyway? Just don't send me a picture please, I've seen goatse already and I don't need to see it again.

Where do you think my understanding of physics is failing me? You can't seem to grasp the concept of storing energy, so I'd be very interested in seeing how you think you know more about the subject than I do.

johno

Nothingbetter2d

vaalea wrote: »

Why do so many people overlook the greens?

cos they made fuel MORE expensive, bailed out when the tough got going, & in general have no balls.

soon ye'll be gone they way of PD's

Nothingbetter2d

johno2 wrote: »

Yeah, about 4.5c of that is carbon tax. So it's roughly a 3% tax. I spend about €30 a week on fuel so it's gonna cost me an extra €1. I'd prefer to buy 5 plastic bags for that €1 and then just throw them in a river. Bloody ridiculous. I have to work for an extra 5 minutes every week to offset some of the damage I do to the environment. I blame God for putting us in such an unfair universe. If this carries on I might have to car pool on long journeys. How crazy is that!

johno

my fuel bill went from €100 a week commuting to dublin from carlow to €140 a week cos of the green's are their carbon tax

a €40 a week increase is alot

thats a box load of black bag rolls to throw in a river

johno2

Nothingbetter2d wrote: »

my fuel bill went from €100 a week commuting to dublin from carlow to €140 a week cos of the green's are their carbon tax

a €40 a week increase is alot

thats a box load of black bag rolls to throw in a river

No it didn't. It went from €100-€136 because of the rise in the international price of oil. It went from €136-€140 because of the carbon tax. €140 a week is very rough. There's no way I could afford to do that much driving on what I earn. Oil is going to get a lot more expensive in the next few months btw.

johno

Nothingbetter2d

johno2 wrote: »

No it didn't. It went from €100-€136 because of the rise in the international price of oil. It went from €136-€140 because of the carbon tax. €140 a week is very rough. There's no way I could afford to do that much driving on what I earn. Oil is going to get a lot more expensive in the next few months btw.

johno

it was unsustainable.... i had to move up to Dublin instead.

a combination of world oil prices, carbon tax, VAT, these new income tax levies (yes they contribute to higher running costs for petrol stations & depots which inevitably got passed down to customers) and also import duties contributed to massive increase in fuel costs

johno2

Nothingbetter2d wrote: »

it was unsustainable.... i had to move up to Dublin instead.

a combination of world oil prices, carbon tax, VAT, these new income tax levies (yes they contribute to higher running costs for petrol stations & depots which inevitably got passed down to customers) and also import duties contributed to massive increase in fuel costs

Well no matter who you are voting for I'm happy to see someone making a sustainable choice. Not happy about the pain, but happy about the change in milage.

johno

ectoraige

vallo wrote: »

For me it is very simple.
First, when I voted green in my top 3 last time I did not think for 1 second that in doing so I was facilitating returning FF to office.

Neither did I. I also didn't think for a second that Fianna Fail would get over 40% of the vote, but sadly they did.

I firmly believe that everything that FF/Greens did since 2007 has exacerbated the problem and they took a series of worst possible decisions resulting in the calamatous break down of the Irish economy. The Greens cannot side step the blame.
Second, for the next 18 months at least it is all about the economy.
All other issues pale into insignificance, so I couldn't care less about any peripheral issues.

Do you accept that had Green policies been implemented in 2000-2007, the environment that led to the banking crisis would not have existed in the first place?

Koyasan

The Green policies that are so derided here are reducing the fuele bills of the most vulnerable members of our society and are "nudging" the country to a more sustainable economic base before it is too late.

The Greens aren't forcing anyone to do anything. The have introduced policies such as levies to incentivise behaviour that is reducing our vulnerability to the oil shocks that everyone agrees are coming, including the International Energy Agency.

But this point has been made here multiple times and in many other threads, and the conversation is getting tired.

So, here are two reasons to Vote Green:

1)
The Greens need to get 2% of No. 1s nationally or else they will not be able to keep their office open. They will not be able to offer the expertise that they have on energy, planning, environmental, local government and revenue neutral taxation (see carbon levy and warmer homes scheme for one example). They will not be able to call out corrupt local FG and FF councillors in South Dublin for what they are trying to do at Ticknock.

My local Green doesn't have a chance so this is how I'm voting: No.1 to the Greens so they get 2% of No.1s nationally and are able to keep an office open. No. 2 (which will definitely transfer) to someone with a chance. Two birds, one STV . If you also have a Green no-hoper in your constituency, consider giving them your No.1 and your No.2 to your real first preference so the Greens can continue to campaign.

2) The Greens destroyed FF.
Throughout Ireland’s history FF have caused many of the problems we have faced. Since 1977 especially, they have been responsible for deeply populist policy approaches, leaving subsequent governments to pick up the pieces. This time round we kept them in place to try tidy up their own mess instead of letting the opposition parties tidy it up for them as usual. This they have actually endeavoured to do, making the tough decisions to get Ireland’s public finances stable again, and have subsequently plummeted into the electoral abyss. If we’d pulled out in week one, they’d be getting off scot-free right now, and that just wouldn’t be right now, would it? As FF themselves acknowledge, the Greens have decimated FF (http://tinyurl.com/6gzuqog), and for that we should be given some credit.

recedite

Arnold Layne wrote: »

So, lets all vote green because it really wasn't their fault.
They didn't know that;
(a) Preventing stag hunting would condemn us, and our descendants,to debt,

Read this;
http://www.tribune.ie/news/article/2010/jul/04/the-achilles-heel-of-the-hunt/

Devious people have redirected your anger away from themselves, and at the Greens. Now they're laughing all the way to the bank.

mikedragon32

OP, thread has become TL/DR, but I will stick burning matches down my japs eye before I'd vote Green again.

I did last time (Wicklow), number one pref too, worked my way down the ballot and stopped before I got to the FF'ers.

This meant that I did NOT want the FFer's to retain power. Your boys and girls decided that what suited them and their need to be in government was more important than what most folks who I know voted Green wanted.

Now, to be sure that you don't get in again and do similar deals with FG, I'll be leaving Green off my ballot too so that Labour will hopefully get in to keep them honest. Hopefully.

mgmt

johno2 wrote: »

Well no matter who you are voting for I'm happy to see someone making a sustainable choice. Not happy about the pain, but happy about the change in milage.

johno

The Green supporters are deluded. How does placing a PSO on ESB bills help anyone. Especially when people are on their knees. I for one will be glad when they are wiped out .

Koyasan

I completely agree,

I'm very disappointed that there are so many people who have fallen for the trick of blaming the party which got 4.6% for the party with 46.3%. It's been pointed out over and over again, but I guess it needs to be done again, that the Irish people decided that they wanted a FF led government when they made it mathematically impossible for an alternative without SF. Enda Kenny vetoed SF, leaving a FF government inevitable.

I'm very happy that the Greens put implementing their policies before it is too late ahead of their popularity. I'm voting for them because they have the only realistic long term policies. I would be very angry if they ignored the chance to put them in place.

Now they need 2% of No.1s nationally to be able to campaign against the bad planning and short-terminism that characterises policies here.

If you have a no hoper, give them your No.1 and your No.2 to your real first preference. It will transfer almost immediately. You'll be voting for the person you like and helping the Greens to campaign. Two birds, One STV

mikedragon32

Koyasan wrote: »

I completely agree,

I'm very disappointed that there are so many people who have fallen for the trick of blaming the party which got 4.6% for the party with 46.3%. It's been pointed out over and over again, but I guess it needs to be done again, that the Irish people decided that they wanted a FF led government when they made it mathematically impossible for an alternative without SF. Enda Kenny vetoed SF, leaving a FF government inevitable.

I'm very happy that the Greens put implementing their policies before it is too late ahead of their popularity. I'm voting for them because they have the only realistic long term policies. I would be very angry if they ignored the chance to put them in place.

Now they need 2% of No.1s nationally to be able to campaign against the bad planning and short-terminism that characterises policies here.

If you have a no hoper, give them your No.1 and your No.2 to your real first preference. It will transfer almost immediately. You'll be voting for the person you like and helping the Greens to campaign. Two birds, One STV

To hell with the Greens. This nonsense puts me right off.

If you believe in them enough, put your own money in. Your post smacks of begging for taxpayer money.

mikom

Just voted there.
Gave our green candidate my No.1 .

...I did in my hole, they didn't even get a preference.

Koyasan

mikedragon32 wrote: »

To hell with the Greens. This nonsense puts me right off.

If you believe in them enough, put your own money in. Your post smacks of begging for taxpayer money.

Which is a nice segway into yet another good reason to Vote Greens No. 1

http://www.scribd.com/doc/47975373/People-powered-politics

Only the Green Party refuse donations from big business and corporations. All of the other parties are funded by vested interests including: big businesses, developers, trade unions and banks.

People power can change politics.

Hundreds of people, including myself, have, as you say, put their money in and made a commitment to try and keep the only progressive voice in the next Dáil.

I put my money where my mouth is. I want Ireland to move beyond the corruption of FF/FG and I invested accordingly. If you look at that link though, you will see the kind of opposition the people of Ireland face, and the need to give Greens your No. 1 today.

Tarobot

Yeah, weird the way FG want to ban corporate donations but are happy to accept donations, probably from the very people who used to give them to FF. Hypocritical to say the least.

Koyasan

This was not mentioned yet surprisingly, so here it is

http://jasonomahony.ie/?p=8512

Actually, a new thread is probably better

mikedragon32

Koyasan wrote: »

Which is a nice segway into yet another good reason to Vote Greens No. 1

http://www.scribd.com/doc/47975373/People-powered-politics

Only the Green Party refuse donations from big business and corporations. All of the other parties are funded by vested interests including: big businesses, developers, trade unions and banks.

People power can change politics.

Hundreds of people, including myself, have, as you say, put their money in and made a commitment to try and keep the only progressive voice in the next Dáil.

I put my money where my mouth is. I want Ireland to move beyond the corruption of FF/FG and I invested accordingly. If you look at that link though, you will see the kind of opposition the people of Ireland face, and the need to give Greens your No. 1 today.

So instead of seeking bungs from corporate sources you'd rather people tinker with democracy.

Giving a green a first preference could affect someone I'd prefer in the Dail getting elected. Asking for a vote to represent the people is one thing. Asking for a vote so that you don't go out of business... Seriously?

No thanks.

Koyasan

mikedragon32 wrote: »

So instead of seeking bungs from corporate sources you'd rather people tinker with democracy.

Giving a green a first preference could affect someone I'd prefer in the Dail getting elected. Asking for a vote to represent the people is one thing. Asking for a vote so that you don't go out of business... Seriously?

No thanks.

Even if they return zero TDs, the Greeen party will still exist. If they get less than 2% nationally of No.1s they will be much less effective at calling out FG/FF/Lab.

That is why there are candidates in every single constituency, even though everyone knows that all but 3 of them have no hope whatsoever.

Asking people to give Greens a First preference is not tinkering with democracy. It's informing people of an option to do two things with their vote:

Elect their preferred candidate and help the Greens to exist. I don't know what your constituency is, but if you think your Green candidate has a great chance and you don't want them getting in then I would advise you NOT to give the Greens your No.1.

Don't paint this to be something it is not. People reading this are smart enough to decide that for themselves how to vote tactically.

ei.sdraob

Koyasan wrote: »

Even if they return zero TDs, the Greeen party will still exist. If they get less than 2% nationally of No.1s they will be much less effective at calling out FG/FF/Lab.

That is why there are candidates in every single constituency, even though everyone knows that all but 3 of them have no hope whatsoever.

Asking people to give Greens a First preference is not tinkering with democracy. It's informing people of an option to do two things with their vote:

Elect their preferred candidate and help the Greens to exist. I don't know what your constituency is, but if you think your Green candidate has a great chance and you don't want them getting in then I would advise you NOT to give the Greens your No.1.

Don't paint this to be something it is not. People reading this are smart enough to decide that for themselves how to vote tactically.

What a load of bull**** and I hope the Irish people see thru the organic manure

You couldnt direct the government when you where in power, now you claim you make good opposition

Do the Greens think people are stupid or something?

Koyasan

You haven't read this.

From a man who does NOT support the Greens

http://jasonomahony.ie/?p=8512

Punishing the Greens would be cutting off your nose to spite your face.
It would be an irrational act. I've seen a number of people already argue with you on similar points on other threads with plenty of referenced facts. I think they have done a better job than I would have time to do here.

ei.sdraob

Koyasan wrote: »

You haven't read this.

From a man who does NOT support the Greens

http://jasonomahony.ie/?p=8512

Punishing the Greens would be cutting off your nose to spite your face.
It would be an irrational act. I've seen a number of people already argue with you on similar points on other threads with plenty of referenced facts. I think they have done a better job than I would have time to do here.

You know whats rational?

not rewarding failure

something the Greens have helped to reward by the billion in the last few years :rolleyes:

Koyasan

You still haven't read it. I've posted it on a new thread to make it easier.

Liam Byrne

Koyasan wrote: »

This was not mentioned yet surprisingly, so here it is

http://jasonomahony.ie/?p=8512

Actually, a new thread is probably better

Stunningly biased article

If only we had a party that was serious about fighting corruption.....

Just think about the logic for a minute: Fianna Fail, the most corrupt party in the country....

....the ones that the greens CHOSE to into government with.

I'm thinking about that logic alright.......and it doesn't add up.

They face total annihilation. Why? Because they went into government?

....with a party that most people didn't want in government, including lots of people who voted Green. Not to mention the above point re corruption.

Because they made decisions that every other party would have been forced to make?

"Forced to make decisions" and "tough decisions" =/= "correct decisions"

My jaw hit the ground as they buckled on Tara and Shannon, two issues where I didn’t really care too much about anyway but which mattered to a lot of their voters.

Then the writer shouldn't dismiss them.

And don’t get me started on neutrality or nuclear power.

Why not, Jason ? Because you'd have to acknowledge that the Greens failed there, too ?

They’re not bought, and they have pursued policies which were unpopular but were right,

Matter of opinion. They abandoned their "polluter pays" principle completely.

if only for the fact that it will cost him less cabinet seats than Labour.

So basically, based on that "if only for the fact", it's a case of "give away less seats regardless of who's best to go into government with, who can act in the country's best interests or is best for the job, and who the people might want most".

That last line is stunning for someone who supposedly complains about "rational planning and reforming politics".

i57dwun4yb1pt8

johno2 wrote: »

I'm sorry to hear you're emigrating.

johno

wow took you 24 minutes to think that up, nice one brainiac :rolleyes:

Koyasan

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Stunningly biased article

Unliken every made up article about the Greens in national newspapers? There are still people on Boards, for example, who think the Greens introduced a new tax on commercial vehicles last year when even the AA say it is false.

Liam Byrne wrote: »

....the ones that the greens CHOSE to into government with.

I'm thinking about that logic alright.......and it doesn't add up.

Not really a choice after Enda Kenny vetoed the only possible alternative. People voted Green to get Green policies implemented. You have to be in government for that in our system. The Greens proposed changes to that system in their manifesto that would make the Dail more like a real parliament. Lets see if the electorate agree.

Liam Byrne wrote: »

....with a party that most people didn't want in government, including lots of people who voted Green. Not to mention the above point re corruption.

Despite a very emotional anti-FF outburst on the Late Late show before the elections in 2007, nearly half of us still wanted FF to lead the government. I think that was an unwise decision, but I have to accept it.

Liam Byrne

Koyasan wrote: »

Despite a very emotional anti-FF outburst on the Late Late show before the elections in 2007.....

Was it real ? Because if it were there wouldn't have been a change of heart

Koyasan wrote: »

.....nearly half of us still wanted FF to lead the government. I think that was an unwise decision, but I have to accept it.

So basically by supporting Greens you are supporting and accepting decisions that you yourself admit are unwise ?

No reform on the horizon with that mentality.

johno2

DaDumTish wrote: »

wow took you 24 minutes to think that up, nice one brainiac :rolleyes:

So it took you 14 hours to come up with that did it?

johno

flutered

Koyasan wrote: »

The Green policies that are so derided here are reducing the fuele bills of the most vulnerable members of our society,
of which i am one, can you please explain how rising prices lead to a reduction in costs.

The Greens aren't forcing anyone to do anything. The have introduced policies such as levies to incentivise behaviour that is reducing our vulnerability to the oil shocks that everyone agrees are coming, including the International Energy Agency.
like having new cars with zero road tax, while mine is taxed to the hilt, the most vulnerable members of soceity can and will never be able to affor these vehicles

But this point has been made here multiple times and in many other threads, and the conversation is getting tired.

So, here are two reasons to Vote Green:

1)
The Greens need to get 2% of No. 1s nationally or else they will not be able to keep their office open. They will not be able to offer the expertise that they have on energy, planning, environmental, local government and revenue neutral taxation
like gormley playing with the incenderator, plus speaking out of both side of his mouth.

. If you also have a Green no-hoper in your constituency, consider giving them your No.1 and your No.2 to your real first preference so the Greens can continue to campaign.
no thank you, some people never realise when they are not wanted.

2) The Greens destroyed FF.
i would say it is the other way around.
i hope to continue their work by not voting green, as they propped up ff while they raped my country.
please remember that flowrey language and an ability to twist things around is not a a substitute for common sense.

K-9

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Stunningly biased article



....the ones that the greens CHOSE to into government with.

I'm thinking about that logic alright.......and it doesn't add up.



....with a party that most people didn't want in government, including lots of people who voted Green. Not to mention the above point re corruption.



"Forced to make decisions" and "tough decisions" =/= "correct decisions"



Then the writer shouldn't dismiss them.



Why not, Jason ? Because you'd have to acknowledge that the Greens failed there, too ?



Matter of opinion. They abandoned their "polluter pays" principle completely.



So basically, based on that "if only for the fact", it's a case of "give away less seats regardless of who's best to go into government with, who can act in the country's best interests or is best for the job, and who the people might want most".

That last line is stunning for someone who supposedly complains about "rational planning and reforming politics".

Stunningly biased post tbh.

As far as I cam see he is acknowledging their failings.

The Greens could have stayed outside Government and just opposed, easy thing to do even though FG didn't do that great a job of it.

They became a small part of a coalition. The reality of coalition is you have to compromise on certain issues to get others enacted.

I think you said before you used your vote last time as a protest, so voted Green. I think people who do that are wasting their vote.

The Greens decided to be above that and try and do something useful and try and enact what they feel is important.

johno2

I'd love to know who the green-haters are actually voting for this time around. 75% of the green candidates have never run before, so there's not that much to separate them on trust issues from independents that you've never heard of before.

FG policies aren't all that different from FF except that they lean a bit more towards christian values on issues like divorce and abortion. There is an argument to be made that they're connections to lobbyists and vested interests are different to the connections of FF, but they certainly have connections there. They raised more money from anonymous sources than any of the other parties running this time.

Labour have Joan Burton at the front bench, that's almost enough to put me off them completely. I still gave them a high preference vote, but it left a bad taste in my mouth. They won't make any difficult decisions and their policies are just populist nonsense really. Anyone who promises to reverse cuts and save public sector jobs in this economic situation can't be taken seriously.

SF are even more populist than Labour because they know they won't be in government and won't have to prove any of the lies they are telling people. At least when FF rob people they do it behind closed doors instead of using sawnoff shotguns and balaclavas.

And Liam, I think it's strange that you would have accepted a FG/green government at the last election but you are totally against it this time.

johno

EDIT: oh, and assuming you voted in Limerick, your green vote didn't go to any elected green TD anyway, so it would have been transferred down to one of your lower preferences.

jjmcclure

My greatest hope for today is that both the Greens and Labour get a kicking. Lefty eejits!!

Kinetic^

Koyasan wrote: »

2) The Greens destroyed FF.
Throughout Ireland’s history FF have caused many of the problems we have faced. Since 1977 especially, they have been responsible for deeply populist policy approaches, leaving subsequent governments to pick up the pieces. This time round we kept them in place to try tidy up their own mess instead of letting the opposition parties tidy it up for them as usual. This they have actually endeavoured to do, making the tough decisions to get Ireland’s public finances stable again, and have subsequently plummeted into the electoral abyss. If we’d pulled out in week one, they’d be getting off scot-free right now, and that just wouldn’t be right now, would it? As FF themselves acknowledge, the Greens have decimated FF (http://tinyurl.com/6gzuqog), and for that we should be given some credit.

Laughable. The only thing the greens kept in place for the last number of years was their arses in the Dail. Staying in power to show FF up for who they really are is a joke of a reason. If there was an ounce of backbone within the party they would've follow Trevor's lead by not getting involved with FF in the first place.

johno2

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Was it real ? Because if it were there wouldn't have been a change of heart



So basically by supporting Greens you are supporting and accepting decisions that you yourself admit are unwise ?

No reform on the horizon with that mentality.

Liam, FF were going to be leading the 2007-2011 government anyway. Like I said before, the only other option for a government was FG/Lab/GP/SF/Ind coalition. You're still blaming the Greens for the Fact that FF got 77 seats.

johno

Liam Byrne

K-9 wrote: »

Stunningly biased post tbh.

No. He's claiming the high moral ground as if we can't afford to exclude the Greens, even though they are as complicit in maintaining the corruption and unwanted activities as could be.

K-9 wrote: »

I think you said before you used your vote last time as a protest, so voted Green. I think people who do that are wasting their vote.

You think wrongly. Don't do that, especially in order to support the incorrect implication that I wasted my vote.

K-9 wrote: »

The Greens decided to be above that and try and do something useful and try and enact what they feel is important.

Ah yes, as the party that's - according to that article - the only one that wants to stop corruption, they got into bed with the crowd the same article says is the most corrupt, and facilitated a number of votes that screwed the country.

What "they feel is important" and "what's required" are obviously completely different.

Liam Byrne

johno2 wrote: »

Liam, FF were going to be leading the 2007-2011 government anyway. Like I said before, the only other option for a government was FG/Lab/GP/SF/Ind coalition. You're still blaming the Greens for the Fact that FF got 77 seats.

johno

Completely incorrect. Some of the electorate are to blame for that.

I'm blaming the Greens for THEIR CHOICE. Not for anything else. And suggesting otherwise is just strawmanning.

If there's a riot by thugs in town later, do I say "ah sure, the riot happens anyway" and join in ?

If a friend of mine marries the local drug-dealer do I say "ah sure, he'll be selling drugs anyway", or do I - rightly - judge her on her bad choices as her actions have lowered my opinion of her ?

Bucklesman

Liam Byrne wrote: »

If a friend of mine marries the local drug-dealer do I say "ah sure, he'll be selling drugs anyway", or do I - rightly - judge her on her bad choices as her actions have lowered my opinion of her ?

I suppose we could take that analogy a step further; would you would continue to disown her after she leaves the dealer on the basis that she should have left earlier? :pac:

Liam Byrne

Bucklesman wrote: »

I suppose we could take that analogy a step further; would you would continue to disown her after she leaves the dealer on the basis that she should have left earlier. :pac:

Well if she'd sold drugs in the meantime (e.g. Anglo, NAMA, stroke-pulling re ministerial positions, u-turning re Shannon & Tara) and abandoned everything that made her half-likeable in the first place (polluter pays), then yes.

Interesting that you chose that analogy to pick up on, btw, and not the one about the riot.

K-9

Liam Byrne wrote: »

No. He's claiming the high moral ground as if we can't afford to exclude the Greens, even though they are as complicit in maintaining the corruption and unwanted activities as could be.

Well that's your opinion. I think he is saying that they still have a use.

Liam Byrne wrote:

You think wrongly. Don't do that, especially in order to support the incorrect implication that I wasted my vote.

Can you clarify that. Was it a high preference you gave them or was it just anybody but FF in Government?

Liam Byrne wrote:

Ah yes, as the party that's - according to that article - the only one that wants to stop corruption, they got into bed with the crowd the same article says is the most corrupt, and facilitated a number of votes that screwed the country.

What "they feel is important" and "what's required" are obviously completely different.

What you feel is important and indeed many others differs. Same as what's required.

Tbh, I think they were naive and picked the wrong time to go into Government.

I'd give them one thing on NAMA, they amended it so that good loans could also go into it. That had its drawbacks too, but will help to offset the cost of it.

ei.sdraob

K-9 wrote: »

Well that's your opinion. I think he is saying that they still have a use.

No he keeps claiming that we need the Greens because they are the "good guys" their time in government has exposed them for who they are.

Canvassers coming on here and acting as if the last few years did not happen is not only cheeky its downright insulting.

johno2

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Well if she'd sold drugs in the meantime (e.g. Anglo, NAMA, stroke-pulling re ministerial positions, u-turning re Shannon & Tara) and abandoned everything that made her half-likeable in the first place (polluter pays), then yes.

Well I'll have to agree to disagree with you on this. Dick Roche tied their hands on Tara and the incinerator the day he left office. That should have been a good enough warning to them of what to expect from FF. I honestly don't think they are the same naive people that went into government 4 years ago though.

I know you have a legitimate complaint about paying extra fees for your septic tank even though it doesn't leak. I'm curious if you ever took that complain beyond boards, like writing to a counciller or TD about the issue?

johno

K-9

ei.sdraob wrote: »

No he keeps claiming that we need the Greens because they are the "good guys" their time in government has exposed them for who they are.

Canvassers coming on here and acting as if the last few years did not happen is not only cheeky its downright insulting.

Well, depending on the make up of the next Government, there maybe no "good guys" left to vote for in the next election!